Streaming comes to Steam: run on your gaming rig, play on your laptop

Windows-based streaming could round out your SteamOS library

Valve is not done redefining itself yet. The gaming juggernaut added ‘operating system developer’ to ‘games studio’ and ‘digital media distributor’ with the introduction of SteamOS. And now it’s adding ‘streaming service’ to its repertoire. The service, currently in beta, allows users to stream game play from one PC to any other PC in their home.

Further Reading

A five-minute walk-through of what Valve's new OS looks like and how it works.

Invited users run a beta version of the Steam client on their computers and have settings for adjusting the amount of bandwidth the stream consumes. Though work is in progress to make streaming an option from OS X and Linux machines, the service is primarily aimed at Windows PCs to start. The Windows focus may, in part, be a result of the relatively larger library of Windows games on Steam.

Valve’s Linux-based SteamOS has one big limitation compared with the full Steam experience: it can only run games compatible with Linux. That limitation may be mostly put to rest when a Steam Box is now paired with a Windows PC, allowing users to run any game in the Steam library either natively in the Steam Box or streamed. The other key benefit to the new streaming option is convenience. Graphically rich games often suffer when run on thermally limited notebooks. Decoding a video stream requires drastically less computing power than rendering a 3D environment, so gaming on a modestly specced laptop could become much more satisfying.

Valve stresses that the major bottleneck for streaming performance will be the host network, since the service doesn’t utilize any cloud services and exists entirely on the sending and receiving machines. The system seems to mirror much of what Nvidia has done with game streaming to its Shield devices, just without the additional hardware requirements. The local nature of Steam's service may have some appeal to privacy advocates, though Steam's reporting already outs the 3,000 plus hours you've spent playing DotA2.

Promoted Comments

I've been toying with it all evening and it works reasonably well for most games. I ran it from an Intel Core i5 3570K / Radeon 6870 / 8GB RAM setup to an HTPC (on a 100Mbps wired LAN) with an Athlon X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and an integrated AMD 780G chipset. Yes, it's an outdated HTPC but it ran most of it just fine.

I found that it skips from 60fps to 30fps automatically at times, which is a little distracting. I might get a better PSU and plug in that old 8800GT to see if reduces the latency.

Pretty impressive but also very usable tech for RTS, racing, sidescrollers and indie titles, but that tiny, tiny bit of latency (that I happened to notice easily) means you may not like it for say hardcore (pro-gamer type) online FPS shooters such as CS:GO, TF2, etc.

I could use my Xbox360 controller as well. Oh and Valve lets you add non-Steam games to the library too, which is sweet!

78 Reader Comments

As a console gamer I don't already have a gaming rig. I'm not buying into the next-gen for at least a year, though. I hope that SteamOS becomes viable in that time, as I don't particularly want to give any money to either Sony or Microsoft if I can possibly avoid it.

I've been toying with it all evening and it works reasonably well for most games. I ran it from an Intel Core i5 3570K / Radeon 6870 / 8GB RAM setup to an HTPC (on a 100Mbps wired LAN) with an Athlon X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and an integrated AMD 780G chipset. Yes, it's an outdated HTPC but it ran most of it just fine.

I found that it skips from 60fps to 30fps automatically at times, which is a little distracting. I might get a better PSU and plug in that old 8800GT to see if reduces the latency.

Pretty impressive but also very usable tech for RTS, racing, sidescrollers and indie titles, but that tiny, tiny bit of latency (that I happened to notice easily) means you may not like it for say hardcore (pro-gamer type) online FPS shooters such as CS:GO, TF2, etc.

I could use my Xbox360 controller as well. Oh and Valve lets you add non-Steam games to the library too, which is sweet!

This is great, I have an HTPC and a laptop that can't really play games, but my desktop is a gaming machine! I'd love to stream games to these devices and play on my TV. Probably needs an ethernet connection for the best performance though, there are way too many WiFi networks in this area.

As a user that is in the streaming beta, I am incredibly impressed by the smoothness, compatibility and ease of use with the streaming. My host is wired, but the client is WiFi.

For the last few days, I've been streaming DOTA matches (to watch) from my gaming PC to my Mac. It's smooth, looks basically perfect (no encoding artifacts to my eye) and is excellent. I haven't tried it to play DOTA yet however.

It even streams non-steam games. I used it to stream LFS to my Mac. Also Chrome and IE11, which brings unintended uses for an office. More and more Macs are being used for web development, you could chuck a machine with game streaming enabled, with IE added to the games list.

My only request to valve would be to actually add a full desktop stream option, to make any config issues able to be done remotely.

I'm in the beta, but unfortunately both my PCs are on wireless and the network is so slow that everything is unplayably laggy. I could buy a new, non-sucky router, since the one I'm using now is the generic ISP router/modem, but that's a substantial expense when both computers can play games to some degree or another anyway.

This looks to be part of exactly what I've been wanting for several years now. Next I just need to set RDP (or equivalent) up, and I'll have almost everything I've ever wanted.

I'm curious as to the specifics of the bandwidth requirements; GbE and 802.11n should be (more than) enough, right? Server* side processing power (for decompression) may be a problem, because I'd like the server machine to be as light and have as long a battery life as possible.

Hmm… this might work well with a Surface RT, if Valve ever releases a server for it.

EDIT: Reading some threads on the forums, GbE and 802.11n (with a solid connection, ofc.) should be more than enough. In fact, people are reporting mixed success with 720p30 over 802.11g. Server side power may be a problem for very small/low end devices, though.

Isn't this really just the X11 Windowing System reimagined and modernized? The concept seems terribly ancient. I once worked for a software developer that created and published an X11 client and server for Windows, and it was awesome fun playing around with that. That was circa 1993!

Not really, because with X11 the on screen objects are drawn locally while all of the program logic is remote. With this, everything is remote and the GPU-rendered result is forwarded to you.

As a console gamer I don't already have a gaming rig. I'm not buying into the next-gen for at least a year, though. I hope that SteamOS becomes viable in that time, as I don't particularly want to give any money to either Sony or Microsoft if I can possibly avoid it.

You can build a compact ~nextgen capable gaming PC for around $500-$700. Throw in Steamsales and you spend less money in the long run than on a console... It is just kind of a hefty intro price for most people. But in a year or so that should get cheaper with APUs taking off.

I've been toying with it all evening and it works reasonably well for most games. I ran it from an Intel Core i5 3570K / Radeon 6870 / 8GB RAM setup to an HTPC (on a 100Mbps wired LAN) with an Athlon X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and an integrated AMD 780G chipset. Yes, it's an outdated HTPC but it ran most of it just fine.

I found that it skips from 60fps to 30fps automatically at times, which is a little distracting. I might get a better PSU and plug in that old 8800GT to see if reduces the latency.

Pretty impressive but also very usable tech for RTS, racing, sidescrollers and indie titles, but that tiny, tiny bit of latency (that I happened to notice easily) means you may not like it for say hardcore (pro-gamer type) online FPS shooters such as CS:GO, TF2, etc.

I could use my Xbox360 controller as well. Oh and Valve lets you add non-Steam games to the library too, which is sweet!

Its running that well without a GPU? lawls, crazy. You probably wouldnt notice the input lag so much with a controller.

This looks to be part of exactly what I've been wanting for several years now. Next I just need to set RDP (or equivalent) up, and I'll have almost everything I've ever wanted.

I'm curious as to the specifics of the bandwidth requirements; GbE and 802.11n should be (more than) enough, right? Server* side processing power (for decompression) may be a problem, because I'd like the server machine to be as light and have as long a battery life as possible.

Hmm… this might work well with a Surface RT, if Valve ever releases a server for it.

EDIT: Reading some threads on the forums, GbE and 802.11n (with a solid connection, ofc.) should be more than enough. In fact, people are reporting mixed success with 720p30 over 802.11g. Server side power may be a problem for very small/low end devices, though.

I'm using it over gigabit Ethernet on the streaming computer, and Wireless N on the client and it's perfect. The stats say the video is only 14mbit bitrate at 1920x1080@60fps so there's tonnes of extra bandwidth.

For me (and millions of other PC gamers), this is pretty much the *only* reason for to even look at SteamOS.

I have a decent-ish gaming rig, and I like gaming on it for most games. but for a few games it would be nice to stream to my TV. If SteamOS can do that and double as a decent HTPC, then it's a definite buy from me, although I'll probably build a lower end machine than any of the steam boxes.

I'm looking forward to try it. I'm currently not interested in Steam OS. I'm glad that the new controller and streaming will work on Windows Steam client. Of course in the future I may consider Steam OS, but now I see no point of it. Steam client is good enough for me now.

I'd like to see Valve eventually release a client ("server" in X11 terminology) for iOS/Android. It would help round out the options, and should be quite practical (it might be a bit harder if some remote GPU technology is being used). Ideally, one that could integrate with a hardware controller, to make at least some games playable.

If Valve's controller supports Bluetooth LE, it could actually be used with iOS without having to be certified as part of the MFi program or anything (the app itself would handle talking to the controller, the OS would have little involvement). I believe regular Bluetooth would work for Android (not sure how common BLE is in Android land).

While on the subject... is there any documentation about the protocol that Steam's Streaming is using? I doubt it's plain VNC (that's likely too slow). Might be mostly just encoding the screen into a video and streaming that over the network (akin to what, say, Twitch would do, plus sending input back). While a computer is Streaming, what's showing up on the screen? Is it the content being Streamed, or does Valve do something more than scraping the screen?

Time to upgrade from to gigabit and ac at the same time, perfect excuse

What would be cool if there was a way for the PC to be doing something else at the same time while you're streaming to the SteamOS box, is that possible? (e.g. watching a vid or something or doing work)

I want to be able to do this over the internet streaming on my local network does have much use for me I don't have any desire to game on my tv but streaming a game to my laptop from my desktop while I'm at say my moms house? That would be cool should be do able in theory 10mbit up should be able to do at least 720p 60fps. Onlive managed it ok when I was on crappy 6mbit dsl

Tried this at a friend's house. Streamed from his main PC to his laptop, which is not slouch in its own right featuring dual 770's. It was streamed over an 802.11ac network, with only the two devices active.

The fidelity was good, and it could handle 1920x1080@30-60fps well enough that it looked like it was being rendered natively, but it wasn't good enough that I would ever consider it for myself for most games. It was a novelty, but not a solution.

The major downside was the latency. It was completely unacceptable. If I had to judge subjectively I'd say it added a good 50-100ms of input lag at its best. This was over a network windows was reporting as 300+mbit for a file transfer, and we weren't dropping packets. Needless to say gaming under those circumstances is frustrating, and that's being charitable.

Would be it possible to get SteamOS's streaming ranked against other streaming solutions? I've heard a lot about Miracast in the last year, and I'm wondering if it's just a fundamental limit with streaming or if there are other tools that can do it better.

This is encouraging. I don't have much incentive to use steam OS, because my desktop machine is Linux and I use the native steam client. I just hope that steam OS takes off enough to pull more AAA titles into the fold. I'm enjoying the mini-renaissance in Linux games that has emerged in the last few years... though it has been mostly the product of charity via kickstarters etc.

Sounds like the remote desktop with GPU support that I've been waiting for forever. I'm really interested in it since I play so few online games and had decent GPUs in both my desktop and HTPC.

I wonder how it goes with non-games too, since supposedly it supports non-steam games. It'd be a nice app sharing feature around the house sometimes, it could be used to take advantage of a PC with faster SSDs instead of HDDs too.

It was a joke. All I have right now is my Macbook to game on while I save money up for the badass PC I'm going to build. I'd like to dip my toes in this because it looks really neat, but since I'll be hooking up my PC to my TV for gaming with a 360 or One controller (whenever those come out) all I'll really need is Steam Big Picture. This looks really neat, but not really what I'm looking for. A 25 foot HDMI cable is all I'll need because no one else in the house will be gaming except for me anyway.

I've been soooo looking forward to the streaming beta. Unfortunately even though I had joined the group, no invite yet. My Linux media server is attached via gigabit network to my gaming PC. And the media server is attached to my bigscreen TV. This feature alone (if it works well enough) will ensure that I don't buy this generation of consoles.

Fingers crossed for an invite. I updated to the steam beta client tonight in case that has something to do with it.

For me (and millions of other PC gamers), this is pretty much the *only* reason for to even look at SteamOS.

Actually, for me, it's a good reason *not* to look at SteamOS. I still might end up building a very, very tiny PC to run SteamOS, but the fact of the matter is that I can now just plug my Surface Pro into the TV via HDMI, use a wireless controller, and stream from my desktop rig.

As cool as this feature is, isn't it sort of cutting the legs out from under Steam Machines? In-home streaming was, for me, the only guaranteed reason to buy one. Now I'm wondering why I'd bother. My Windows PC works fine, and if I can just bring my Surface to any TV in the house I want to play on, I officially don't need a Steam Machine to do that (and I can also play local Steam games if push comes to shove).

Then you leave it on your desk ,next to you on the couch,bedroom,kitchen,toilet... and stream it to your ancien 2006 macmini already attached to your controller,TV,stereo,wireless headphone,remote keyboard...

I also made it into the beta, and my experience largely mirrors those of others here.

The service works surprisingly well, all things considered; the ideal scenario has both systems wired with gigabit but at least running the client on a strong wifi signal does not degrade it enough to be unusable.

My host is an overlcocked i7 920 with a 7970 on Windows 7 and I tried streaming to two targets: my Win7 notebook (with an i5 2520M dual-core 2.5GHz) and a crusty old linux DVR with a S939 Athlon64 dual-core at about 2.2GHz and an 8800GTS 320MB.

The experience to the notebook is excellent; latency varies based on game, with the best adding about 30ms or so and the worst about 80ms-100ms. Effectively, twitch shooters are not that great (TF2, UT, Quake, etc...) but a slow-paced FPS (ArmA or a single-player storyline game) and any RTS, racing game or platformer all are just fine. The system appears to want to use about 14mbps if it can get it, but the image quality is still just fine even when restricted down to 5mbps.

The DVR, on the other hand, seems to be a bit too old to stream content effectively. I get lots of stutters and frame drops, and I suspect that it's because the GPU is too old to do hardware decoding offload of the video stream (while the newer notebook is probably able to pull this off).

A tip for maximum performance and image quality: after you launch the game, go into the options and set the resolution to match the *client* that you're using; this will prevent resampling (improving sharpness) and will save the host from rendering unnecessary pixels.

Another interesting note: The current version apparently *doesn't* support the use of a gamepad via DirectInput on the Windows client (presumably Xinput works though) but such a gamepad works just fine on a Linux client using the uinput drivers present there.

An unexpected bonus that is much appreciated: If you're in the streaming beta (and presumably everybody once it's activated) you can have as many computers as you want logged in to a steam account simultaneously without booting each other off. This makes it easy to keep a DVR logged in to steam big picture ready to go while still being able to launch and close your steam client on your main rig at will. Very convenient!